AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Research Article | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2690-1919/017
*Corresponding Author: Saeed Shoja Shafti, Full Professor of Psychiatry, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Razi Psychiatric Hospital Tehran – Iran.
Citation: Saeed Shoja Shafti (2020) Tutoring Journal Club as an Imperative Scholastic Maneuver : A Local Probe. J Clinical Research and Reports, 2(2); DOI: 10.31579/2690-1919/017
Copyright: © 2020 Saeed Shoja Shafti. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Received: 08 January 2020 | Accepted: 20 January 2020 | Published: 24 January 2020
Keywords: training programs; journal club; educational curriculums; instructive methods
Introduction: while journal clubs are a time-honored method of reviewing and discussing the scientific literature in medicine, hitherto there is no universally accepted definition of that. Purpose of the present study involved a comparison between instructive values of meetings that are directed by an authentic faculty member in comparison with conferences that are usually coached by chief residents.
Methods: Forty-two psychiatric residents (from two psychiatric training centers) have been quizzed about the intentions, principles or importance of journal club. Both of said colleges had comparable settings, conferences and alike standard psychiatric journals. In one of them the papers were chosen usually by chief resident, who was as well coordinator of the conferences, while in the other one, articles were chosen habitually by a faculty member, as director and coordinator of sessions. After at least one year of attending in associated sessions, all the participants were asked to answer incognito to a Survey Questionnaire, including 23 questions, involved multiple answers, with different Coding Categories. Analysis of data was performed by way of ‘Comparison of Proportions’. Quantities in each group, as well, were analyzed in line with percentage of responds to different Coding Categories. Significance was defined as P≤0.05.
Results: While all participants replied questionnaires, significant difference was evident between two groups regarding their response to at least twelve questions. Judgment of residents were generally and remarkably different with regard to : ‘goals’ , ‘format’ ,’necessity of attendance’ ,’quality of participation of faculty’ , ‘educational value of core curriculum of journal club’, ‘its critical role with regard to research and appraisal of topics ‘, and in conclusion ‘as a resource for continuous education’.
Conclusion: While journal club formats are educationally diverse and appear to be more effective if they have a leader, disciplined organization of journal club by a skilled faculty member may enhance scientific insight and instructive gratifications of apprentices.
A journal club (JC) is a group of persons who meet repeatedly to debate critically the clinical applicability of articles in the present medical journals. While the medical journal club is usually a part of the medical didactic system, the medical literature has not detailed the rich history of this significant tradition. The emphasis of journal clubs has ostensibly shifted over the years. What was once a setting in which the world's recent literature was analyzed became a setting for talking over clinical issues raised by the writings and, most recently, a setup for learning critical reading skills to doctors or other associated authorities (1). But till now there is no generally accepted definition of JC, even though this scholastic modality has been around for more than a century and has evolved substantively during this time (2). Initially the main goal of the JC was to help contributors keep up-to-date of the growing body of medical texts. Over time the emphasis of JC has progressed to teaching critical assessment skills and evidence-based medicine, while maintaining the original objective of helping apprentices and practicing physicians keep up-to-date in the research literature of their field (3). Currently, improving patients’ care, refining reading habits, teaching critical appraisal skills, increasing the use of medical literature in clinical practice and increasing knowledge of clinical epidemiology and biostatistics, are among the main objectives of JCs (4). On the other hand, while one randomized controlled trial did not find any improvement in critical appraisal skills, six less methodologically rigorous studies found possible improvement in critical appraisal skills (5). So, while there is huge published literature describing JCs conducted in different surroundings and for different health clients, there appear to be no ‘Gold Standard’ manners for conducting a JC, or to appraise its efficacy in helping practitioners translate knowledge into practice (6). Thus, it is an ongoing challenge for clinicians to design and maintain an exciting and instructive JC layout that helps the participants to stay up to date with the scientific and medical writings, and to translate JC activities into evidence-based practice (7, 8, and 9). Nevertheless, while traditional JC are ubiquitous in medical departments and health care institutes, this informative modality has a deep history in medicine and related health sciences all over the world (10, 11). On the other hand, the flexibility and intellectual challenge provided by JC have encouraged its usage not only in general medicine and several medical specialties, but besides in dentistry, nursing and other associated health careers (12, 13 and 14). Over again, it is fascinating and puzzling that with such widespread dissemination of the JC methodology, lack of valid papers with respect to its usefulness in the field of medical education is noticeable (15, 16). There are many reports of its use as an instructive instrument and stratagem, but almost none about its application for discussing medical education published papers (17). Additionally, the impact of supervision on JC’s outcome is not accurately recognizable, because related studies by Van Derwood et al. (18) and Linzer (19) have exposed unpredictable outcomes as regards the effect and quality of supervision on ensuing aftermath of JC. For instance, while Van Derwood had stressed on the role of faculty or a faculty-and-resident team regarding improvement of usefulness of such meetings, Linzer confirmed higher attendance rates in conferences, which were supervised by chief residents. So, purpose of the current study involved a comparison between instructive values of meetings that are directed by an authentic faculty member in competition with conferences that are coached by chief residents.
Forty-two psychiatric residents (from two psychiatric training centers) have been quizzed about the intents, principles or importance of JC. The first group involved 24 psychiatric residents from Iran University of Medical Sciences (IUMS) and the second group comprised 18 psychiatric residents from University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences (USWR). Both of said colleges had somewhat similar courses that could make them comparable regarding the current evaluation. Similar setting, conferences and alike standard psychiatric journals were among the analogous variables, in this regard. In IUMS, papers were chosen usually by chief resident, who was as well coordinator of the conferences, while in USWR, articles were chosen habitually by a faculty member, as director and coordinator of sessions. In general, in both of said academic centers clinical research papers and systematic reviews were among the most preferred selections. Besides, participation in meetings was mandatory in both of them. While conferences in IUMS were performed commonly with supervision of chief resident, in accompany with feeble contribution of some of the faculty members, in USWR it was being directed mainly by an assistant or associate professor, in accompany with constant involvement of other faculty members. In both of them and at the end of every conference, joint discussion and critical review of the discoursed topic was a routine process. It is mentionable here that neither of the aforesaid faculties or residents in none of the said academic centers had passed any opening course for reviewing the aims, principles or meaning of JC. After at least one year of attending in associated sessions, all abovementioned residents were asked to answer incognito to a Survey Questionnaire, including 23 questions, involved multiple answers, with different Coding Categories. This Inquiry form had been used, as well, as Community Medicine (Public Health) Resident Journal Club (CMR-JC) survey in some earlier alike studies [19].
Statistical analysis:
Participants were compared on baseline characteristics using chi-square tests for categorical variables and t tests for continues variables, in order to measure the homogeneity between the two evaluated groups. While analysis of data was performed by way of ‘Comparison of Proportions’, quantities in each group had been analyzed in line with percentage of replies to different Coding Categories. Significance was defined as P≤0.05. MedCalc Statistical Software version 15.2 was used as statistical software tool for analysis.
At the outset, groups were analogous and demographic characteristics were comparable (Table 1).
| Variables | IUMS (n=24) | USWR (n=18) | X2 | t | p | 95%CI | ||
Nationality/native | 100% | 100% | ||||||
Gender/female | 13(54%) | 8(44%) | 0.62 | 0.53 | -0.208 to 0.402 | |||
Gender/male | 11(45%) | 10(55%) | 0.62 | 0.53 | -0.207 to 0.401 | |||
Age, y | 30.89±2.52 | 31.44±2.91 | 0.65 | 0.51 | -2.25 to 1.15 | |||
Married residents | 16(66%) | 13(72%) | 0.38 | 0.69 | -0.338 to 0.227 |
Table 1: Demographic Characteristics of Participants.
All of the said residents responded anonymously to the aforementioned survey questionnaire. Among 23 different queries in CMR-JC, the preferred response to one specific reply was significantly different, in between-group analysis, in twelve of them (Table 2) (Figure 1).
| Queries with meaningful variance | Preferred reply | IUMS (N=24) | USWR (N=18) | Z | P | CI |
Q 1-Inyour opinion what is the most important goal of a journal club(JC) | To keep with current literature | 29.16% | 66.66% | 4.72 | 0.033 | 7.08% to 59.72% |
Q 2-Which of the above goal/goals is achieved by JC | To keep with current literature | 33.33% | 72.22% | 4.76 | 0.029 | 8.36% to 60.55% |
Q 3- found attending JC to be of educational value | Agree | 20.83% | 55.55% | 3.99 | 0.045 | 5.35 % to 57.33% |
Q 4-You found preparing for JC to be of educational value | Agree | 20.83% | 61.11% | 5.47 | 0.019 | 10.42% to 62.18% |
Q 5-In your opinion JC helped in development of research protocols | Agree | 29.16% | 66.66% | 4.92 | 0.035 | 7.18% to 59.72 |
Q 6-Has your research work/dissertation come out of a JC? | Yes | 16.66% | 78.22% | 13.48 | 0.0002 | 31.63% to 77.98% |
Q 7-Presentation at JC helped refine your research work? | Agree | 12.5% | 55.55% | 7.019 | 0.008 | 14.42% to 64.54% |
Q 9-In your opinion JC provides stimulus to further review a topic | Agree | 16.66% | 77.77% | 13.29 | 0.0003 | 31.16% to 77.68% |
Q 11-Please indicate the most important reason/reasons for your decision to attend JC | To keep with current literature |
25% |
66.66% |
5.68 |
0.017 | 11.30% to 63.10% |
Q 13-Which of the methods for continuing education do you prefers the most? | Journal club | 29.16% | 61.11% | 4.51 | 0.047 | 5.26% to 47.234% |
Q 15-In your opinion the current format of JC is satisfactory | Agree | 37.5% | 78.22% | 5.34 | 0.020 | 10.39% to 61.62% |
Q 16-In your opinion is residency program faculty participation in JC satisfactory? | Agree | 12.5% | 61.11% | 8.85 | 0.002 | 19.48% to 68.90% |
Table 2: Between-group analysis of preferred replies different queries.
‘To keep with current literature’ was the most frequent reaction among both groups concerning the first question, which was significantly more prevalent in USWR (66.66% vs. 29.16%, X2=4.72, p<0>‘to impact clinical practice’ with nearly equal percentage (15-20%).With respect to the second question, 77.22%of the residents of USWR, as opposed to 33.33% of them in IUMS, pointed to ‘keep with current literature’ (X2=4.76, p<0>to teach critical reading skills). With respect to the 3rd, 4th, 5th, 7th, 9th, 15th and 16th query, the primary response of participants was ‘agree’, which over again was meaningfully different between the groups (p< 0>‘neither agree nor disagree’. Another time, concerning the 6th query [Has your research work/dissertation come out of a JC?], 78.22% of the residents in USWR, as opposed to 16.66% of them in IUMS, answered ‘Yes’ (X2=13.48, p<0>indicate the most important reason/reasons for your decision to attend JC], similarly, 66.66% of participants in USWR, set against 25% of residents of IUMS, pointed‘To keep with currentliterature’ (X2=5.688, p<0>‘to impact clinical practice’ (20.83% and 16.66% of participants in USWR and IUMS, respectively). A few also had pointed to other answers like ‘mandatory attendance’ and ‘to improve presentation skills’ or ‘others’. Moreover, with respect to 13th query [Which of the methods for continuing education do you prefers the most?], 61.11% of the residents of USWR, in competition with 29.16% of residents of IUMS, pointed to ‘Journal club’(X2=4.518, p<0>‘conferences’ (25%and 38.88% of participants in USWR and IUMS, respectively). There was no substantial difference between residentsof IUMS and USWR regarding the remaining queries.
JCs have been used as a learning design in academic medicine for over a hundred years. While their beginning is supposed by some to have occurred in Europe in the mid 1880s, Sir William Osler is most often acknowledged as their founder. He began this tradition in North America at McGill University in 1875 for the buying and dissemination of journals to which he could not afford to subscribe as an individual (2). Fourteen years later at Johns Hopkins University, Osler established The Book and Journal Club which was considered to review the latest medical studies in addition to providing a setting for associates to recommend new works for the hospital library (6). The JC has progressed a great deal since its inception and is now existent in medical colleges and residency training programs in approximately every field of medicine (15). But, while JC has been a mainstay in graduate medical education for many years, designing a layout to make it both inspiring and instructive for its participants has demonstrated to be a great challenge and has only recently been addressed in the medical writings (20). Anyhow, there are several initiatives to increase the scholastic importance and impression of JC, like the usage of team-based and problem-based learning (20). As said before, though JC are popular and used frequently in academic health centers, there is little published information about JC dedicated to the subject of medical education (21). This restricted amount of data is astonishing, since the field of medical education has grown hugely in the last years, as shown by the rising number of medical education organizations and academic venues, large global number of master in health professions education programs, and the variety of related research papers and scientific journals (22). So, there is a need to properly explore the use of JC in medical education settings, to promote the use of didactic evidence by clinicians and basic science educators (23). On the other hand, while there are plans for organizing and maintaining a JC, one of the consistent recommendations is that these scholastic events need specific objectives and a designated leader or arranger (6). So, it is proposed that a nonstop professional development action in the form of a periodic face-to-face JC can be preserved in the long-term by means of evidence-based schemes (24, 25). Back to our discussion, the main aim of the present study included evaluation of the role of mentorship on understanding of intentions, values and meaning of JC. As said by outcomes, skillful tutoring may guarantee better impact on such objectives. While such an end-result is consonant with the findings of Van Derwood et al. (18) and Heiligman and Wollitzer (1987) (26), it is to some degree in contrast with Linzer’s proposal (1). Our finding shows that scientific information demands realistic insight, proficiency and passion, as well, to be dynamic enough. In a survey of family practice JC, Van Derwood et al. (18) had found that presence rates were highest in conferences moderated by the faculty or a faculty-and-resident team, as compared with meetings moderated by residents alone. Also there was a significant association between the attendance at JCs by the faculty and residents and the program instructor's perception of its learning significance (27). Heiligman and Wollitzer (26) also had defined success in JCs by the level of instructive skill. In this regard, associated factors involved regular attendance of a nominated leader, besides mandatory presence of residents. On the contrary, Linzer confirmed higher attending rates in a JC led by a chief resident (28). In this regard, Linzer and colleagues compared two plans for coaching critical reading skills to internal medicine residents; one conference was led by an internist faculty member, and the other by a chief resident with invited subspecialists. According to the findings, the faculty-led team reported analysis of fewer articles, although there was a more complete evaluation of the subject (29). Also in another study, a resident-run model of JC was developed based on Adult Learning Theory. A 30-question survey, also, was generated to evaluate residents' outlooks and agreement with the new model. In line with the findings, all participants preferred the new model in comparison with the old model. Residents reported that the new model had increased their medical knowledge and they were able to apply the approaches learned in JC to genuine patients (30). On the other hand, in a national survey of emergency medicine residency programs, Jouriles et al. reported that many of training programs did not have learning goals for their JCs (31). Also, resident’s underestimation of himself or herself, which could prevent proper or mutual participation during the meetings, should be addressed carefully by the tutor, because it may possibly cause adverse outcomes with reference to ultimate goals of the program. Inspiration of suitable assertiveness and exchange of data with other associates, as well, can be viewed as one of the useful aspects of JC. Small sample size and limitation of study to only two colleges were among the main weaknesses of this survey. No doubt, outcomes of this study demand further confirmation by more methodical and inclusive studies.
While journal club formats are educationally diverse and appear to be more effective if they have a leader, disciplined organization of journal club by a skilled faculty member may enhance scientific insight and instructive gratifications of apprentices.
The author gratefully acknowledges psychiatric residents of USWR and IUMS for their valuable participation in the present study.
Clearly Auctoresonline and particularly Psychology and Mental Health Care Journal is dedicated to improving health care services for individuals and populations. The editorial boards' ability to efficiently recognize and share the global importance of health literacy with a variety of stakeholders. Auctoresonline publishing platform can be used to facilitate of optimal client-based services and should be added to health care professionals' repertoire of evidence-based health care resources.
Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Intervention The submission and review process was adequate. However I think that the publication total value should have been enlightened in early fases. Thank you for all.
Journal of Women Health Care and Issues By the present mail, I want to say thank to you and tour colleagues for facilitating my published article. Specially thank you for the peer review process, support from the editorial office. I appreciate positively the quality of your journal.
Journal of Clinical Research and Reports I would be very delighted to submit my testimonial regarding the reviewer board and the editorial office. The reviewer board were accurate and helpful regarding any modifications for my manuscript. And the editorial office were very helpful and supportive in contacting and monitoring with any update and offering help. It was my pleasure to contribute with your promising Journal and I am looking forward for more collaboration.
We would like to thank the Journal of Thoracic Disease and Cardiothoracic Surgery because of the services they provided us for our articles. The peer-review process was done in a very excellent time manner, and the opinions of the reviewers helped us to improve our manuscript further. The editorial office had an outstanding correspondence with us and guided us in many ways. During a hard time of the pandemic that is affecting every one of us tremendously, the editorial office helped us make everything easier for publishing scientific work. Hope for a more scientific relationship with your Journal.
The peer-review process which consisted high quality queries on the paper. I did answer six reviewers’ questions and comments before the paper was accepted. The support from the editorial office is excellent.
Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. I had the experience of publishing a research article recently. The whole process was simple from submission to publication. The reviewers made specific and valuable recommendations and corrections that improved the quality of my publication. I strongly recommend this Journal.
Dr. Katarzyna Byczkowska My testimonial covering: "The peer review process is quick and effective. The support from the editorial office is very professional and friendly. Quality of the Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on cardiology that is useful for other professionals in the field.
Thank you most sincerely, with regard to the support you have given in relation to the reviewing process and the processing of my article entitled "Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of The Prostate Gland: A Review and Update" for publication in your esteemed Journal, Journal of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics". The editorial team has been very supportive.
Testimony of Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology: work with your Reviews has been a educational and constructive experience. The editorial office were very helpful and supportive. It was a pleasure to contribute to your Journal.
Dr. Bernard Terkimbi Utoo, I am happy to publish my scientific work in Journal of Women Health Care and Issues (JWHCI). The manuscript submission was seamless and peer review process was top notch. I was amazed that 4 reviewers worked on the manuscript which made it a highly technical, standard and excellent quality paper. I appreciate the format and consideration for the APC as well as the speed of publication. It is my pleasure to continue with this scientific relationship with the esteem JWHCI.
This is an acknowledgment for peer reviewers, editorial board of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. They show a lot of consideration for us as publishers for our research article “Evaluation of the different factors associated with side effects of COVID-19 vaccination on medical students, Mutah university, Al-Karak, Jordan”, in a very professional and easy way. This journal is one of outstanding medical journal.
Dear Hao Jiang, to Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing We greatly appreciate the efficient, professional and rapid processing of our paper by your team. If there is anything else we should do, please do not hesitate to let us know. On behalf of my co-authors, we would like to express our great appreciation to editor and reviewers.
As an author who has recently published in the journal "Brain and Neurological Disorders". I am delighted to provide a testimonial on the peer review process, editorial office support, and the overall quality of the journal. The peer review process at Brain and Neurological Disorders is rigorous and meticulous, ensuring that only high-quality, evidence-based research is published. The reviewers are experts in their fields, and their comments and suggestions were constructive and helped improve the quality of my manuscript. The review process was timely and efficient, with clear communication from the editorial office at each stage. The support from the editorial office was exceptional throughout the entire process. The editorial staff was responsive, professional, and always willing to help. They provided valuable guidance on formatting, structure, and ethical considerations, making the submission process seamless. Moreover, they kept me informed about the status of my manuscript and provided timely updates, which made the process less stressful. The journal Brain and Neurological Disorders is of the highest quality, with a strong focus on publishing cutting-edge research in the field of neurology. The articles published in this journal are well-researched, rigorously peer-reviewed, and written by experts in the field. The journal maintains high standards, ensuring that readers are provided with the most up-to-date and reliable information on brain and neurological disorders. In conclusion, I had a wonderful experience publishing in Brain and Neurological Disorders. The peer review process was thorough, the editorial office provided exceptional support, and the journal's quality is second to none. I would highly recommend this journal to any researcher working in the field of neurology and brain disorders.
Dear Agrippa Hilda, Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, Editorial Coordinator, I trust this message finds you well. I want to extend my appreciation for considering my article for publication in your esteemed journal. I am pleased to provide a testimonial regarding the peer review process and the support received from your editorial office. The peer review process for my paper was carried out in a highly professional and thorough manner. The feedback and comments provided by the authors were constructive and very useful in improving the quality of the manuscript. This rigorous assessment process undoubtedly contributes to the high standards maintained by your journal.
International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. I strongly recommend to consider submitting your work to this high-quality journal. The support and availability of the Editorial staff is outstanding and the review process was both efficient and rigorous.
Thank you very much for publishing my Research Article titled “Comparing Treatment Outcome Of Allergic Rhinitis Patients After Using Fluticasone Nasal Spray And Nasal Douching" in the Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology. As Medical Professionals we are immensely benefited from study of various informative Articles and Papers published in this high quality Journal. I look forward to enriching my knowledge by regular study of the Journal and contribute my future work in the field of ENT through the Journal for use by the medical fraternity. The support from the Editorial office was excellent and very prompt. I also welcome the comments received from the readers of my Research Article.
Dear Erica Kelsey, Editorial Coordinator of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics Our team is very satisfied with the processing of our paper by your journal. That was fast, efficient, rigorous, but without unnecessary complications. We appreciated the very short time between the submission of the paper and its publication on line on your site.
I am very glad to say that the peer review process is very successful and fast and support from the Editorial Office. Therefore, I would like to continue our scientific relationship for a long time. And I especially thank you for your kindly attention towards my article. Have a good day!
"We recently published an article entitled “Influence of beta-Cyclodextrins upon the Degradation of Carbofuran Derivatives under Alkaline Conditions" in the Journal of “Pesticides and Biofertilizers” to show that the cyclodextrins protect the carbamates increasing their half-life time in the presence of basic conditions This will be very helpful to understand carbofuran behaviour in the analytical, agro-environmental and food areas. We greatly appreciated the interaction with the editor and the editorial team; we were particularly well accompanied during the course of the revision process, since all various steps towards publication were short and without delay".
I would like to express my gratitude towards you process of article review and submission. I found this to be very fair and expedient. Your follow up has been excellent. I have many publications in national and international journal and your process has been one of the best so far. Keep up the great work.
We are grateful for this opportunity to provide a glowing recommendation to the Journal of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy. We found that the editorial team were very supportive, helpful, kept us abreast of timelines and over all very professional in nature. The peer review process was rigorous, efficient and constructive that really enhanced our article submission. The experience with this journal remains one of our best ever and we look forward to providing future submissions in the near future.
I am very pleased to serve as EBM of the journal, I hope many years of my experience in stem cells can help the journal from one way or another. As we know, stem cells hold great potential for regenerative medicine, which are mostly used to promote the repair response of diseased, dysfunctional or injured tissue using stem cells or their derivatives. I think Stem Cell Research and Therapeutics International is a great platform to publish and share the understanding towards the biology and translational or clinical application of stem cells.
I would like to give my testimony in the support I have got by the peer review process and to support the editorial office where they were of asset to support young author like me to be encouraged to publish their work in your respected journal and globalize and share knowledge across the globe. I really give my great gratitude to your journal and the peer review including the editorial office.
I am delighted to publish our manuscript entitled "A Perspective on Cocaine Induced Stroke - Its Mechanisms and Management" in the Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. The peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal are excellent. The manuscripts published are of high quality and of excellent scientific value. I recommend this journal very much to colleagues.
Dr.Tania Muñoz, My experience as researcher and author of a review article in The Journal Clinical Cardiology and Interventions has been very enriching and stimulating. The editorial team is excellent, performs its work with absolute responsibility and delivery. They are proactive, dynamic and receptive to all proposals. Supporting at all times the vast universe of authors who choose them as an option for publication. The team of review specialists, members of the editorial board, are brilliant professionals, with remarkable performance in medical research and scientific methodology. Together they form a frontline team that consolidates the JCCI as a magnificent option for the publication and review of high-level medical articles and broad collective interest. I am honored to be able to share my review article and open to receive all your comments.
“The peer review process of JPMHC is quick and effective. Authors are benefited by good and professional reviewers with huge experience in the field of psychology and mental health. The support from the editorial office is very professional. People to contact to are friendly and happy to help and assist any query authors might have. Quality of the Journal is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on mental health that is useful for other professionals in the field”.
Dear editorial department: On behalf of our team, I hereby certify the reliability and superiority of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews in the peer review process, editorial support, and journal quality. Firstly, the peer review process of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is rigorous, fair, transparent, fast, and of high quality. The editorial department invites experts from relevant fields as anonymous reviewers to review all submitted manuscripts. These experts have rich academic backgrounds and experience, and can accurately evaluate the academic quality, originality, and suitability of manuscripts. The editorial department is committed to ensuring the rigor of the peer review process, while also making every effort to ensure a fast review cycle to meet the needs of authors and the academic community. Secondly, the editorial team of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is composed of a group of senior scholars and professionals with rich experience and professional knowledge in related fields. The editorial department is committed to assisting authors in improving their manuscripts, ensuring their academic accuracy, clarity, and completeness. Editors actively collaborate with authors, providing useful suggestions and feedback to promote the improvement and development of the manuscript. We believe that the support of the editorial department is one of the key factors in ensuring the quality of the journal. Finally, the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is renowned for its high- quality articles and strict academic standards. The editorial department is committed to publishing innovative and academically valuable research results to promote the development and progress of related fields. The International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is reasonably priced and ensures excellent service and quality ratio, allowing authors to obtain high-level academic publishing opportunities in an affordable manner. I hereby solemnly declare that the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews has a high level of credibility and superiority in terms of peer review process, editorial support, reasonable fees, and journal quality. Sincerely, Rui Tao.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions I testity the covering of the peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal.
